DraftKings Fights to Revoke Interactive Games Geolocation Patent

Gambling giant DraftKings has petitioned the US Patent and Trademark Office to challenge US Patent No. 12,406,284, held by Interactive Games LLC. This development follows a lawsuit by global financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald, accusing DraftKings of violating patents allegedly belonging to its now-inactive gambling-technology arm, Cantor Gaming. DraftKings now seeks to attack the patent itself. DraftKings Claims the Patent Contains Nothing New US Patent No. 12,406,284 gives gambling companies a means to block users from placing wagers when they are in a jurisdiction where such activities are prohibited. This geofencing solution also controls the distribution of promotional materials and alerts users when they are in a restricted area. However, DraftKings claims that none of the patent’s claims are actually new inventions. According to the gambling giant, the patent’s concepts were well-known long before its 2009 filing. DraftKings claims that such technology is now ubiquitous and cannot be protected by the contentious Interactive Games patent. The company also contends that the claims are obvious in view of prior art, making the claims unpatentable. During prosecution, the Examiner did not apply the material prior art or straightforward combinations presented here, which render every challenged claim obvious. DraftKings petition Two of the five patents involved in April’s lawsuit between Interactive Games and DraftKings were invented by US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick during his time as Cantor Gaming CEO. These patents are now the property of Interactive Games and are at the center of the current clash with DraftKings. Geofencing Technology Is Critical for Mobile Wagering This dispute is also developing outside of the Patent and Trademark Office. Interactive Games took DraftKings and FanDuel to court, alleging that the two sportsbooks had violated five of its patents. DraftKings tried to dismiss the challenge, arguing the patents were overly abstract and were ineligible for proper protection. The implications of this clash could stretch far beyond the companies involved. Geofencing technology has become an operational necessity for many gambling operators in the US. Individual states have different gambling regulations, so mobile wagering companies aiming to remain compliant must track individual customers and ensure they cannot place a bet from a prohibited jurisdiction. Past precedent would favor DraftKings in this case. FanDuel faced a similar challenge from Interactive Games, and the Patent Office eventually ruled that only one of the several claims was patentable. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board must now decide whether DraftKings’ petition has merit. It may then launch an investigation and take appropriate action.